135mm 2.8: Ugly duck or ...

sanmich

sanmich

Veteran
Local time
1:22 PM
Joined
Nov 3, 2006
Messages
3,420
View My Gallery
Hi all

the Elmarit-M 2.8 googled seems to go for pretty low prices.

Is there any reason for this?

Maybe the heavy artillery look??

Any user around here?

Thanks

Michael

P.S. If it's a fantastic lens, very underpriced, do not answer to this thread, PM me.
I would like to keep those prices low...😛
 
135 is widely held to be too long for 35 mm RF cameras. Optically, the lens of which you speak is excellent. I used it for a roll or two years ago.
 
Dear Michael,

I've had two. The first, I bought maybe 30 years ago but sold 10 years ago because it was too big and heavy (and of course awkward-shaped) and I used it too seldom, though when I did us it, I got good pics.

Then I borrowed one as part of an article I was doing on the M8 and fell in love with it all over again. Fortunately the person I borrowed it from was interested in selling. Even better, he had bought it new; it was the next-to-last that Leica had in stock. And he'd hardy used it.

Yes, the goggles bring up 90mm and the RF base is also magnified. On the M8 it's a 180mm equivalent and works even better than on film. I love it.

I wouldn't worry about the price, though, as there are LOTS of them out there and mine is a minority view.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
Hi Roger

Thanks for your answer.

I didn't know the lens is both engaging the 90 frame AND increasing the image size.
So you end with a frame larger than the 90 and shoot a 135?
That sounds excellent. A super match for an M3...

OK it's big, but Now I really understand even less the lack of interest of RF'ers in that lens...

Anyhow let's keep it that way 😎

Michael


Roger Hicks said:
Dear Michael,

I've haad two. The first, I bought maybe 30 years ago but sold 10 years ago because it was too big and heavy (and of course awkward-shaped) and I used it too seldom, though when I did us it, I got good pics.

Then I borrowed one as part of an article I was doing on the M8 and fell in love with it all over again. Fortunately the person I borrowed it from was interested in selling. Even better, he had bought it new; it was the next-to-last that Leica had in stock. And he'd hardy used it.

Yes, the goggles bring up 90mm and the RF base is also magnified. On the M8 it's a 180mm equivalent and works even better than on film. I love it.

I wouldn't worry about the price, though, as there are LOTS of them out there and mine is a minority view.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...
 
It's cool 😉
DSCF1784.jpg
 
Dear Michael,

The enlargement of the 90 frame to 135 is sort of a by-product of the enlarged (1.5x) RF base, but yes, it's very good for an M3 because it gives you the biggest possible 135 image area in the finder.

Cheers,

R.
 
The Elmarit is also very good for the M2, since it allows using a 135 without an external viewfinder. I was thinking of selling mine since I have the Tele-Elmar, 2 Hectors and a Nikkor as well for 135s. Now I am having doubts after reading this thread.
 
I'm thinking on buying one Elmarit-M 2.8 googled, I'll be using it in a M6... I should use it with the googles?, are they removable? is it a good buy? any advice will be wellcome, thanks
 
Hi,

It is a nice big lens. If you don't need the speed you better get the tele-elmar.
You have to use the goggles. Without them it will not focus properly.
Try to get the later version which has slightly improved image quality.
There are several now on ebay.

Cheers,

Michiel Fokkema
 
Marsopa said:
I'm thinking on buying one Elmarit-M 2.8 googled, I'll be using it in a M6... I should use it with the googles?, are they removable? is it a good buy? any advice will be wellcome, thanks
Click to expand...
Goggles are fixed. I think it may focus if you saw them off but why do so? Increased focusing accuracy plus the lens calls up the 90mm frame so you'd have to use a separate 135 finder (or push the lever or modify the mount) as well.

Cheers,

R.
 
At 2.8 you have a pretty shallow DOF, so I think the increased focusing accuracy the goggles provide is must.

Besides the goggles look kind of cool in a funky sort of way.
 
Thanks, I'll try find a nice one... I thought that googles were like in the 35mm, just if you don't have 135mm framelines.
 
I had two as well. Excellent lens, like Roger said, brings up 90mm framelines and enlarges the finder by factor 1.5. And I like teles on RFs. Actually, the goggles on the M3 will slightly cover the 90mm framelines.

The only downside is the bulk and weight. For me it is easier to carry an OM1 with Zuiko 135/2.8 along an M outfit than add the 135/2.8 to the bag. As simple as that.

Roland.
 
Ken Ford said:
I very much like how mine performs but I rarely use it. It's a popular lens to dog, particularly if you're opinionated and have never owned one!
Click to expand...
Dear Ken,

Very true! Yes, it's a big, awkward object, and I don't use mine all that often; but when I do... On top of that, they're so cheap that it's almost silly not to have one.

I'm also surprised that Roland finds an SLR + 135 smaller. If I set my 135/2.8 next to the smallest combo I own -- Pentax SV + 135/3.5 Takumar -- the 135/2.8 is still smaller, faster, delivers better quality and (with later Leicas) metered.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
I might be sometimes a little partial to Zuikos, Roger 🙂

In any case, here is my favorite Elmarit landscape to at least appear un-biased 🙂 :

195926909_WBbxN-L.jpg


Looks great 20" high at the wall ...

And to give people a feeling of the size here next to a small 35/2 and a small 85/2:

84654151_LZaLW-O.jpg


Cheers,

Roland.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom